CHILDREN WELFARE TRUST (REGD),FARIDABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 3637/Del/2024 (A.Y 2016-17) Children Welfare Trust (Regd) Vs National Faceless C/O. Gita Balniketan Senior Assessment Centre, Secondary School, 3-E, Nit, Delhi (Nafac) Faridabad Delhi Pan: Aabtc6957B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Pavan Ved, Adv, Shri Mohit Gupta, Ca, Sh. Mirza, Ca & Shri Sarthakkh Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms.Pooja Swaroop, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/08/2025

reassessment proceedings in following manners:- “It is respectfully submittedthat the fee received from students is credited under various heads, building and amalgamation funds being one of them. It is further submitted that building fund is the amount collected from Children Welfare Trust Vs. CIT(E) new admissions and it is spent for the purpose of construction of building. Amalgamation fund

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. RITES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

section 37/36(l)(vii) of the Act. (iii) That in any case, the disallowance is merely on the basis of change of opinion and same is not sustainable in the case of reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance

RITES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

section 37/36(l)(vii) of the Act. (iii) That in any case, the disallowance is merely on the basis of change of opinion and same is not sustainable in the case of reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance

COMPAREX INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

80G amounting to INR 15,14,475/- already claimed by the Appellant in its Return of Income. Interest and Penalty Grounds: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in levying interest under sections 234B and 234C of the Act in the final assessment order passed for relevant

ADIT (E), DELHI vs. M/S ASIAN CENTRE FOR ORGANISATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT., NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 11 & 12 of the Act for the reasons assigned in the assessment order as well as reason to believe recorded by the AO for reopening the assessment. Elaborate reasons were recorded for initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 and the ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the fact that there will be no question of change of opinion when

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. JAKSON LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

147 of the Act has been passed containing multiple factual discrepancies and hence the order passed is not valid and liable to be quashed. (d) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the approval taken by Ld. AO u/s 151 is mechanical approval as the same has been granted by PCIT/CIT instead of PCCIT/PDGIT/ CCIT/ DGIT

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. JAKSON LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

147 of the Act has been passed containing multiple factual discrepancies and hence the order passed is not valid and liable to be quashed. (d) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the approval taken by Ld. AO u/s 151 is mechanical approval as the same has been granted by PCIT/CIT instead of PCCIT/PDGIT/ CCIT/ DGIT

JAKSON LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-4, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

147 of the Act has been passed containing multiple factual discrepancies and hence the order passed is not valid and liable to be quashed. (d) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the approval taken by Ld. AO u/s 151 is mechanical approval as the same has been granted by PCIT/CIT instead of PCCIT/PDGIT/ CCIT/ DGIT

BRIJBASI EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III, NEW DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

80G thereof. The Appellant filed its return of income on 14th September, 2006 declaring nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny, and pursuant thereto, an Assessment Order under section 143(3) was passed on 15th December 2008. The Assessee preferred an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] who confirmed the same vide

RAJ KUMAR KARANWAL,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. PR.CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2010-11

u/s 143(2) was issued/served during re-assessment proceedings and that too in accordance with law. d) That impugned reassessment order was passed without complying with the mandatory conditions of section 147 to 151.” 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee individual is a wholesaler and distributor of medicines. He filed his return

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

reassessment.\nIn our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also\nequivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for\nexample, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the\nintimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant\ntimes. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of\nJindal

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306 ITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising additional ground of appeal qua treatment of sales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

reassessment.\nIn our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also\nequivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for\nexample, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the\nintimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant\ntimes. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of\nJindal

SHREE CHANDI MAA MAHAKALI PRACHIN MANDIR SIDH PEETH SAMITI,SONIPAT vs. CPC, BANGLORE

reassessment.\nIn our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also\nequivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for\nexample, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the\nintimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant\ntimes. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of\nJindal

GUJRAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

147 of the Act\n30.03.2005\nDate of Supreme Court order in the case of\nCIT vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd: 306\nITR 392\n16.09.2008\nDate of application filed before CIT(A) raising\nadditional ground of appeal qua treatment of\nsales/ purchase tax subsidy as capital receipts\n05.11.2008\n26.1 Perusal of the above chart would show that the assessee